Finding out what’s in ObamaCare: premium hikes
posted at 10:12 am on September 8, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
After the polls showed that the newly-passed ObamaCare bill remained deeply unpopular with voters, the Obama administration reshuffled the rollout in order to convince Americans what a great deal they would get. By “front-loading” the most popular provisions to make them effective immediately, the White House hoped that the momentum would shift to support for the one legislative achievement of Barack Obama’s turn — or at least neutralize its negative influence. Instead, ObamaCare remains as unpopular as ever, and the bill will come due just before the midterms:
Health insurers say they plan to raise premiums for some Americans as a direct result of the health overhaul in coming weeks, complicating Democrats’ efforts to trumpet their signature achievement before the midterm elections.
Aetna Inc., some BlueCross BlueShield plans and other smaller carriers have asked for premium increases of between 1% and 9% to pay for extra benefits required under the law, according to filings with state regulators.
These and other insurers say Congress’s landmark refashioning of U.S. health coverage, which passed in March after a brutal fight, is causing them to pass on more costs to consumers than Democrats predicted.
There is more than a little irony involved:
In addition to pledging that the law would restrain increases in Americans’ insurance premiums, Democrats front-loaded the legislation with early provisions they hoped would boost public support. Those include letting children stay on their parents’ insurance policies until age 26, eliminating co-payments for preventive care and barring insurers from denying policies to children with pre-existing conditions, plus the elimination of the coverage caps.
Weeks before the election, insurance companies began telling state regulators it is those very provisions that are forcing them to increase their rates.
And even more irony: these premium hikes will hit individual and small-group plans hardest. The ObamaCare bill was supposed to make it easier on individual policy holders, not tougher. Instead, they’ll pay the biggest cost in the short term.
The White House has already accused these insurers of unfair pricing, but that just proves that the administration didn’t understand the industry they wanted to run themselves. Front-loading new benefit mandates means higher costs for insurers. Insurers pass higher costs to consumers in premium increases. If there were no costs associated with these new benefit mandates, they wouldn’t have had to been mandated in the first place. This is Econ 101, and yet no one in the Obama administration appeared to have realized what “front-loading” new benefits would mean.
Democrats have tried pleading that ObamaCare will eventually lower costs for everyone while giving more benefits to everyone, an empty promise that will get exposed much sooner than they anticipated, thanks to the Obama administration. Small wonder most of them have stopped talking about ObamaCare on the campaign trail.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
This is nothing – wait until the provisions in bill kick in that cut the funding to the hospitals and providers who serve a disproportionate share of the poor. Voters may be upset about their perminum increases but they won’t take to the streets & riot. What do you all think will happen when the county hospitals shut down, CHUSA shuts their doors and there are literally people dying in the street?
batterup on September 8, 2010 at 1:14 PM
“yet no one in the Obama administration appeared to have realized what “front-loading” new benefits would mean.”
Legislation written by people that have never held an actual job and who never learned how things actually work.
Obamunistcare has to go.
dogsoldier on September 8, 2010 at 1:15 PM
Don’t know if this is a MN thing or not, but I just got a letter from BCBS telling me my individual policy was grandfathered in and if I wanted to have the new federal mandates included in my policy I would have to have a new policy written, but expect large premium increase with the new mandates.
I had to laugh when I read it. It was a great big FU to Obamacare. Just glad for now,I really do get to keep my affordable existing coverage.
Ellie Mae on September 8, 2010 at 1:20 PM
Does anyone know if the provision limiting the amount of time that women are allowed to receive fertility treatments (in some versions, only one year) made it into the final draft of the bill? That’s a huge concern of mine, because I haven’t had children yet. I’m still young, and, god-willing, I’ll be able to have kids naturally with no assistance, but if I need it, I want it to be there, and I recall fertility care being a major target of rationing in early versions of the bill.
Meantime, Aetna is my insurance provider, and I won’t be at all surprised to see my premium go up. Meanwhile, rent prices in the area have skyrocketed $120/month in one year, so I’m now having to downgrade my living situation in order to keep up.
Are there any honest economists out there admitting it’s a depression yet?
Animator Girl on September 8, 2010 at 2:08 PM
The circle is now complete on this one since the DOJ announced it is basically not going to enforce voter registration laws.
The last election was I wager pretty close for a lot of people.
It would be interesting to get a handle on just how close it was.
How many won bcs of dead, illegal alien, felon, & non-existent voters?
This really has to stop.
I know much of America is full of idiots.
But bcs of voter fraud, they are being over represented.
Badger40 on September 8, 2010 at 2:22 PM
Oh-& my health ins with BC/BS went up some, too. But not much.
This all comes in time, however, for contract negotiations with our school district.
It is for our nice health care package that I teach school.
Our pay is somewhat lower, but when your’re getting a large % of a family policy paid for, it’s worth it.
So now if the school district can’t cover what they did before, I am looking at a pay reduction bcs they probably won’t be able to cover as much anymore.
So why should I even teach if I’m losing $$?
I might as well go do something else & let some loser take my place.
I suppose the community here would like that.
They get mad when I make science ‘hard’ for their kids.
Badger40 on September 8, 2010 at 2:26 PM
Pat Cadell? The DEMOCRAT pollster, who worked for Clinton? One more remark like that, and he’ll probably get thrown under the bus and start working with Dick Morris!
Steve Z on September 8, 2010 at 2:53 PM
I’m a small business owner and my group insurance is going up 69% in January; makes the figures cited in today’s WSJ article seem like small change.
Repeal, repeal, repeal….
redfoxbluestate on September 8, 2010 at 3:09 PM
I am with Aetna and my single person coverage just went up $40 per month.
Even if this disaster of a healthcare law gets repelled do you think the insurance companies will drop the premiums back to pre-O’care rates.
Hell no, think again.
Bruce Hendrix on September 8, 2010 at 3:15 PM
Don’t mention it, Trafalgar. You were just taking a much needed “denial break” from the insanity that obasoros has decided to treat the nation to. Sorry to have to bring you back, but we need our best and brightest on the front lines.
tigerlily on September 8, 2010 at 3:26 PM
And with George Soros’ “Secretary of State Project”, aimed at making sure that the corrupt SoS’s that the Dems want get elected, the voter fraud circle is not only complete, it’s tied up with a nice big bow.
Al Franken is sitting in the senate because an election was stolen. Eric Holder is criminally violating the Voter Law statute that requires him to enforce that all states provide proof that their voter rolls have been cleared of phonies, felons, deceased and re-located. When these stay on the rolls, the Dems load up on absentee ballots and have all of these vote. In a close or even semi-close election, it’s all you need.
The military are being actively disenfranchised through purposefully late ballots being sent to them overseas.
Frog march ‘em all. In matching orange and laceless sneakers.
tigerlily on September 8, 2010 at 3:40 PM
All right, so we’re faced with two, seemingly insurmountable possibilities then.
The Obama Administration and its supporting Democrats are either:
a) Preposterously stupid and short-sighted
or
b) Underhandedly attempting the total dismantling of our capitalist republic.
“A” seems hard to imagine, especially if these are all educated (some ivy-league), career politicians. I mean I learned in 8th grade social studies the answer to “why don’t we just print more money and give it to ourselves?” was because it would cause massive inflation and societal collapse. Are we really to believe they’re dumber than 8th graders?
“B” sounds like a nutjob conspiracy theory that reaches back decades and makes Obama out to be nothing more than a meat puppet with a teleprompter. It’s a check-out lane pulp novel; an Alan J. Pakula spy-thriller. Are we really to believe these people are colluding on a national suicide pact under the delusion it will work better?
What else is there? A little from A, a little from B? Something in the water? Constipation?
Which is it, dumb or evil?
somewhatconcerned on September 8, 2010 at 4:25 PM
My wife does lite bookkeeping for a small local business and she and her boss attended a conference this morning on accounting for and implementing the health care law. They cam out shell shocked and he is seriously considering closing the doors. He is getting close to retirement and said that this law will push him over the edge financially.
Must say that Obama has been very successful in getting what he wants, a ruined America.
Engrpat on September 8, 2010 at 5:08 PM
somewhatconcerned on September 8, 2010 at 4:25 PM
Option C: Obama is really Dark Helmet. He really believes we’re all stupid
WashingtonsWake on September 8, 2010 at 6:19 PM
I have no worries regarding DeathCare.
I am over 40 so I am not worth saving or spending money on. Believe me, my company will dump me ASAP and pay the fine as soon as they can. I am sure due to my posts here and at other sites I am on “the list”.
Add my name on “the list” to my age and I can count on being denied any treatment whatsoever by the Death Panel…..I mean Cost Containment Board.
Therefore, I am going to let myself go. Why bother?
Brush my teeth??? No way. Just let em’ rot. I’ll be dead before they all fall out.
Continue to run and work out????? Hog wash. I’m eating all the Big Macs and Chocolate I can. I’ll be dead soon from lack of care anyhow.
This has lifted such a burden off of me. I feel….so….so….FREE!
Bikerchick on September 8, 2010 at 10:02 PM
Health insurance is an odd kettle of fish. My daughter graduated from college this year. Therefore our group health insurance dropped her at the end of the month she graduated in. The age 26 thing won’t kick in until 2011 (maybe).
Since she doesn’t have a full time job yet, we opted to buy a individual policy for $95 /mo with $5000 deductible.
For many years our family was insured by BCBS, but since I retired, we now have health insurance from three different companies for three people.
ObamaCare has only complicated everything. Benefits they said were there were not (at least not yet), but the costs will be there in 2011, all three insurance companies have sent pre-announcements that changes are coming. I am sure they will all be substantial increases.
Dasher on September 9, 2010 at 12:22 AM
Well, isn’t this just great!
We just finished renewal at work. We are a small group, most of us are middle to lower-middle class and the majority of our jobs are blue collar. A good percentage of us are living paycheck to paycheck these days, as ours is an industry that depends on our clients discretionary income.
In order to keep our existing Aetna plan, we would have to pay a 31% increase in premiums. 31%. I was shocked…I knew it was coming but 31%??? After a lot of research I chose a similar plan with slightly higher co-pays and a premium increase of “only” 20%. This also means that we are no longer grandfathered when the rest of this legislation kicks in. But it was either that or go with a different, never heard of carrier who offered much lower premiums but a less extensive provider network. To my co-workers who complained, I told them to please feel free to direct their grievances to the Obama administration.
If you like your insurance plan, you’ll get to keep it. If you like your doctors, you’ll get to keep them. While Joe Wilson was referring to a different part of this legislation, his words to the President apply here as well:
“You lie!”
WaltzingMtilda on September 9, 2010 at 1:41 AM
I didn’t mention it, but our BC/BS plan sent out letters a while back telling us we had til Sept 30th to add kids up to 26yo on our family plan.
But that’s only if you claim them as a dependent.
Now my 21yo daughter already gets health ins through her work, but can’t afford to insure her baby for an extra $300+/month.
Evidently I can’t add her to mine bcs she’s not my dependent. And the father has no ins-& so now they’re just both paying for baby expenses out of pocket.
If my daughter were to apply for Medicaid, she would get it for the baby, but the father would get garnished for it.
So he has to apply himself.
So this adding your older kids thing doesn’t seem very possible for a lot of people unless they’ve got lazy kids or kids in grad school.
I really wish the govt would get out of providing health care for people at all except veterans.
This would lower the cost of medical services.
But nooooo….
Badger40 on September 9, 2010 at 8:25 AM
My RomneyCare bill just jumped 22% this month. This, with a supposed influx of “mandatory customers” that would somehow provide more revenue to lower individual premiums for all.
Hmm – a customer base not allowed to opt out or seek competing services, coupled with a tight cartel of politically-connected insurance providers… want to guess which direction the premium prices will head next year?
P.S. If you’re of the ilk who still think that Romney should be President, you should kindly go to hell. Thank you.
DarthBrooks on September 9, 2010 at 10:13 AM
So, the Obamacare stuff mandates represented premium increases of from 1-9% in the individual market, yet the total premium increases were more in the range of 20%-30%? Doesn’t that mean most of the increases weren’t related to Obamacare?
Jimbo3 on September 9, 2010 at 12:08 PM
I’m going to go out on a limb here & hypothesize that health ins companies wouldn’t want to be demonized right now for raising their rates too high.
I don’t know where th 1-9% Math Figure comes from-but I’ll wager that the companies calculated their own rises in cost compared to the bottom line & raised rates accordingly.
And so some more efficient companies are going to perhaps smaller rises than others.
And a 1-9% ‘error’ is pretty doggone big. At least in most scientific venues.
I don’t trust anybody’s math anymore.
Badger40 on September 9, 2010 at 12:41 PM
I am a group of 1. My monthly premium just increased 25%. Thank youuuuuu Democrats.
steveracer on September 9, 2010 at 3:49 PM
I personally think that you all better take a deep breath. This is tricky waters.
AnninCA on September 9, 2010 at 7:29 PM
What do you mean by this hit & run thing:
Are you suggesting that it’ll all blow over or what?
Seriously. OMG.
Badger40 on September 10, 2010 at 2:18 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2